You can find ample historical evidence of police overreach in American society through out most of the history of the country. The police in the Jim Crow south were the KKK members that were on the public payroll. In the north they were often used to suppress union organizing. The FBI under J. Edgar Hoover was notorious. However, it is becoming increasingly clear that something fundamental changed in the systematic overhaul of the security state that took advantage of the climate of fear engendered by the events of 9/11.
We first began to get a public glimpse of the developments in the government responses to the Occupy movement. Prior to that few people were aware that there was a national network of
fusion centers. The efforts to shut down Occupy protest were conducted by local law enforcement using mostly conventional crowd control measures against mostly you white middle class protesters. What was notable about them was the uniformity of the approach. Explorations revealed that there was considerable federal coordination coming through the Dept' of Homeland Security operated fusion centers. The Occupy movement turned out to have very little backbone and staying power. Overwhelming force was not required to send it blowing into the wind.
Probably the next visible appearance of the changing nature of US law enforcement was the bombing of the Boston Marathon. While it turned out to be a local action with only a few participants, this really did fit the bill for terrorism and there were at least vague connections to international Muslim activities. However, what was shocking was the massive militarized manhunt to capture the single surviving suspect. We got a glimpse of all the military hardware and the federal coordination of it. People in a sizable area of suburban Boston were essentially confined to their homes for several hours.
Along comes Ferguson. A young unarmed black man is shot dead by a white policeman. The black community conducts protest marches. While certainly tragic, there is nothing really new or unusual about the events. What is different is that the protests are met with an overwhelming police response using the same sort of militarized equipment that appeared in Boston. DHS in cooperation with the Pentagon has been equipping and training police forces across the country to respond to any occasion of community disorder in such a manner. All of this federal money floating around has spawned a network of private enterprises eager to get their hands on some of it.
What set me off on this survey and inspired the title was a story in today's Washington Post about one of the effects of the post 9/11 security state. Police have been embolden and encouraged to engage in a widespread seizure of cash from American citizens without benefit of warrants or court orders. There was an earlier diary specifically about this story. I am interested in its links to the broader pattern of federalized law enforcement.
Behind the rise in seizures is a little-known cottage industry of private police-training firms that teach the techniques of “highway interdiction” to departments across the country.
One of those firms created a private intelligence network known as Black Asphalt Electronic Networking & Notification System that enabled police nationwide to share detailed reports about American motorists — criminals and the innocent alike — including their Social Security numbers, addresses and identifying tattoos, as well as hunches about which drivers to stop.
Many of the reports have been funneled to federal agencies and fusion centers as part of the government’s burgeoning law enforcement intelligence systems — despite warnings from state and federal authorities that the information could violate privacy and constitutional protections.
This isn't just about keeping America safe. It is about putting money into to coffers of government agencies at the federal, state and local level and into the hands of private enterprise. The biggest problem with this is the lack of public visibility and accountability that has accompanied these developments. There are definite parallels here with what we found out from Snowden's revelations about the NSA. One of the things we don't know about are the connections between DHS and NSA. It certainly seems likely that they exist. There has been something of a bureaucratic turf war between the two agencies over which one would have primary jurisdiction over cyber security issues. Protecting the privacy of the American public was not a topic on the agenda.
Recent events in Ferguson and in several other locations have put a focus on racial profiling and police brutality. This is not something that just started after 9/11. It has been there all along. However, in exploring the specific cases that have been the focus of recent public attention, it becomes clear just how pervasive is the policy that the police have the backing of the courts and government administrations to take violent actions when dealing with anything that they perceive as a threat. The rule of thumb is shoot first and make excuses later.
In Ferguson the Obama administration has actually raised some public questions about these trends. Attorney General Holder and the DOJ have taken an active role in conducting an independent investigation and the President made some general remarks about the need to reevaluate the trends towards the militarization of police activities. It is too soon to tell what the practical results of any of that will be. What is clear is that over the past 13 years the US has followed a trend away from the concern for the protection of civil liberties that was manifest by the Warren court. The Bush administration actively exploited 9/11 to push a conservative effort to impose a security state. It will probably be up to historians down the road to make a considered evaluation of the role that the Obama administration has played in the maintenance of the security state. At the very least, there is little evidence of much effort to date to roll it back.